On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote: > > Actually WE DO. > > No matter how much you proclaim it, YOU DO NOT.
We do not 'proclaim' anything dearest. it's a statement of fact. > You are mimicing what I write. No dearest. We are not mimicking anything of yours. The whole of your post--just like many others-- are verbatim repetitions of the surface of what we wrote. Additionally, you have no capacity to understand the concepts we wrote about (nor those of NN) as you are illiterate, unconscious and blind. Nor are you capable of PERCEIVING since you continuously + catatonically knee-jerk from your wishful delusions. > Plus that of NN. Plus many others. No dearest. Nothing of what we have ever written is that of "NN." Citations of others are not "mimicry". We don't engage in infantilistic mimicry, no matter how much you'd like to project we do. > > A bit like a kid trying to play grown up. > > We are all kids playing at being grown ups. No babycheeks. Speak for yourself. We_ are not kids playing grown ups. There are also other humans who are not infantile imbeciles. Avoid appropriating everyone's voice. But that is your favorite isn't it? Bleat, the 'community.' Bleat, we area ll equal and the same. Time to wake up babycheeks. Your infantilism is your own problem. You are the only one infantile + incompetent. > > The "lists" are not ALLEGED. They are demonstrable and have been > > DEMONSTRATED (made obvious, reified) to OTHERS. > > Bah "bah" yourself impotent idiot. > > Nor are YOU_ capable of perceiving the "crimes" we speak of > > as those are VISIBLE to CONSCIOUS INDIVIDUALS ONLY. > > Hence we 'obviate them' by 'writing about them'. > > You 'obviate' plausible but not necessarily actual motivations. No dearest. We obviate actual behavior. We are not obviating MOTIVATIONS. This is not a speculation. We are obviating what YOU ARE DOING UNCONSCIOUSLY. In response you're knee-jerking alternately from your brain, ego, and conflated sexuality-reproductive system, impotently, passive-aggressively and bleating "you just don't understand". Another guess what. We do understand. And you are not the delusional tale which you try to peddle. You're not 'mysterious'. You're not 'veiled by clothes'. You're a naked ape parading in its delusion and fancying itself 'clothed'. > > (which is something you LACK) are simply DEFENSIVENESS. > > I have nothing to lose here, and nothing to defend. Defensiveness is not defense. It is accurate that you have nothing to DEFEND. Yet you are a defensive and passive-aggressive. And that my dearest is a mechanistic unconscious unfortwright attempt at attack on another's energy, aka attempt at energetic feeding. AAA. Feed me. It's performance art. Feed me. Ah look : you just obviated 'one' of the 'alleged' list accusations. Tell us how you're 'perpetually amused' again in this masochistic self-abusive stupor?
